Listen to the expert – Prakash Munshi – who has spent years in analysing and unfolding the hidden dangers, and how our Government and the Private Players are hiding stuff from us ….
More information at https://www.facebook.com/reduceemfradiation/ including presentation by Juhi Chawla
I have told them to confirm in writing and have told them that till my mobile is started again I will continue claiming Rs. 2,000/- per day compensation. I challenge them to provide documentary evidence how porting request is treated as termination request.
Anil Ambani, you may be a big man. But don’t forget you are not above law. I understand that some of your senior team members are behind bars for some wrongful acts of some company of yours. I challenge you to specify in public to clarify what u r achieving by haressing customers who wish to port their number? I understand hundreds if not thousands of customers are complaining of portability issues.
I am reserving my right to purchase one share of your company and question the management in the Annual General Body Meeting of your company in front of all shareholders of the company the haressment caused to mobile users with statistical details of portability requests.
Friends my personal view is whenever we face a problem irrespective of the high and mighty person he may be ( this suggestion is not just against Anil Ambanis Reliance group but all products purchased as consumers from different industrialist, manufacturers) we should post it on social media which is a very powerful tool. You may be haressed but at least you will get satisfaction of warning others of the malpractice / deficiency of service provided by company. I will for the next one month guide free of charge consumers in person who have suffered at the hands of mobile company.
Gone are the days when consumers were considered weak. I feel some corporates commit wrongful acts with the help of battalion of persons. Be it tax evasion etc. Tax evasion of shell companies, vodaphone tax demands etc are just a tip of the ice berg. So much is spoken about 3G, 4G, but nothing is spoken of earlier years when in my view mobile companies have literally looted government of its resources. Similarly in my view oil (from sea )as of date is commercially looted of the government by powerful industrialists.
As far as mobile companies are concerned I thave a strong feeling that they evade stamp duty on franchise agreement. As a soldier of consumer movement I will take up this fight to the best of my ability with authorities to levy stamp duty on franchise agreements. Best of luck Anil Ambani and one free advice to you to recheck if you have paid proper stamp duty on all your franchise agreements since formation of Reliance group. The penalty for evasion of stamp duty in Maharashtra is 2% per month for the period of default. Maximum penalty is 400%. I appeal to government authorities particularly stamp authorities all over India to recheck if proper stamp duty is levied on franchise agreements executed by all persons all over India.
Friends I will appreciate if u share your views as regards haressment by mobile companies, other manufacturers, service providers. It may be a service for some unknown friend, sitting somewhere cutting across continents but reading such posts.
Wish me goodluck friends in my fight against the high and mighty.
Vinod Sampat
9987622225
To implement procedure and practice for installing Mobile Towers on the terrace or to display advertisement board / hoarding on the building of the Co-operative Housing / Premises Societies:
We are being cheated by telecom companies every day.
We have all seen TV ads by telecom companies with claims of super fast internet available on the highest mountains and farflung islands. But the truth is that we don’t get good internet even inside our homes in metro cities. They promise 21Mbps or even 100Mbps, but can barely deliver 2Mbps.
Our phone signals are horrible and data speeds are worse. India has really poor implementation of 3G Internet, with only a third of the towers being 3G enabled. But instead of fixing them, the telecom companies are busy hard selling us the 4G dream.
No matter which telecom company we subscribe to or whether our connection is 2G, 3G or 4G, the internet speed is extremely slow and the connection is very erratic.
Why don’t we get good internet speed?
TRAI has fixed the minimum speed for 3G speed at 1Mbps and has asked telecoms to ensure that they don’t fall below this speed for at least 95% of the time. But the reality is that most 3G customers don’t get a stable 3G connection half of the time. According to a recent report by Ericsson, 48% mobile customers found no difference between 2G and 3G speeds. TRAI has also asked all telecoms to clearly communicate the minimum data speed they provide for 2G, 3G, and 4G in all ads and customer materials. This is also not being implemented.
TRAI has imposed penalties of Rs.1.5 lakh for delivering service below set standards. Do you think that amount will scare the telecom giants? Plus, the biggest irony is that TRAI makes its decisions based on Quality of Service reports compiled by the telecom operators themselves and not by an impartial, independent body.
Sign our petition and join us in asking TRAI and the Telecom Ministry to:
The average internet speed in India stood at 2.7Mbps whereas it was 26.8Mbps in the UK, 14Mbps in Spain and 11Mbps in Turkey. Even Indonesia had a higher average speed at 4.4 Mbps. India is one of the slowest mobile connected countries in the Asia Pacific. How can we compete with rest of the world if our internet slows us down?
Sign the petition asking TRAI and the Telecom Ministry for proper regulations to guarantee consistent internet speeds and services on mobile devices that the customers are paying for. It is time telecoms are held accountable for the tall claims they make in their advertisements.
Click Here to sign the petition
The Bombay High Court on Monday directed the state government and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) not to grant any further permission for installation of mobile towers in playgrounds, recreation grounds, parks and gardens.
The HC was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by several petitioners, including NGO Nagar (NGO Alliance of Government and Renewal) and charitable organisations Agni Trust and Organisation for Verdant Ambience and Land Trust, which challenged the notification issued by the state government on March 4, 2014, permitting installation of mobile towers in public open spaces like playgrounds, recreation grounds, parks and gardens.
“If you want to bring about such modification, you have to issue a public notice as this has far reaching ramifications. Fortunately nothing has been done so far. If one company has sought setting up of 1,400 towers, other might also make similar requests,” argued Chinoy.
The PIL states that no objections/suggestions from the public were called for before issuance of the notification and seeks for the notification to be quashed and set aside.
“The notification prohibits installation of mobile towers in the premises of schools and colleges as well as adjoining buildings within three meters from the boundary walls of schools and colleges on the ground that it will have deleterious effect on youth and students. It, however, arbitrarily permits the installation of mobile towers in recreation grounds, playgrounds, parks and gardens, which are primarily frequented by children, and youth for playing, exercise and leisure,” stated the PIL.
The petition further stated that the notification will lead to depletion of Mumbai’s already overburdened open spaces. “The availability of open spaces in Mumbai are abysmally below the national average and any further encroachment on these spaces is detrimental to the public interest,” it further stated.
On October 3, 2013, the state government published a notification inviting objections and suggestions to a proposed draft notification on installation of mobile towers issued under MRTP Act but had excluded land under any reservation in the concerned DP. The installation of telecom towers on reservations (including non-buildable reservations like playgrounds, recreation grounds etc) was first proposed by a mobile telecom company, stated the PIL. The state government then issued the notification on March 4, 2014 which allowed installation of towers in open spaces.
The court asked Chinoy if the mobile towers seeking permission were 4G towers and was told “they must be”.
ruhi.bhasin@expressindia.com
In summary, the International EMF Scientist Appeal calls upon the United Nations, the WHO, and the UN Member States to:
UNEP is the UN’s “voice for the environment” and is uniquely positioned to take a planetary view of the potential for harm that EMF pollution presents to biology — the evolution, health, well being and very survival of all living organisms world-wide. EMF scientists are giving warnings about clear signs of adverse biological and health problems that are affecting people and nature. Now is the time to ask serious questions about this emerging environmental health crisis.
The Rs 19,000 crore mystery: How the CAG figure for “undue benefit” to Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Jio shrank
In a report that was tabled in Parliament on 8 May 2015, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India indicted the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) for providing an “undue benefit” to Reliance Jio—a telecom company owned by Mukesh Ambani as part of Reliance Industries Limited (RIL)—by allowing Jio to offer voice services under the Broadband Wireless Access (BWA) spectrum. According to the report, the cost of this “undue benefit” was Rs 3,367 crore. However in a draft report that had been released by the CAG in August 2014, the figure for the undue benefit was Rs 22,842 crore.
In its draft report, the CAG was highly critical of the government for allowing Reliance Jio to use Infotel Broadband Services Private Limited (IBSPL) as a front company to acquire broadband spectrum. IBSPL was, at that time, a tiny internet service provider promoted by Anant Nahata—the son of Mahendra Nahata, who is the promotor of Himachal Futuristic Comunications Limited (HFCL), a manufacturer of telecom products and a provider of telecommunication services. Interestingly, HFCL came into the limelight in 2011, when it was alleged that Datacom, a company owned jointly by Videocon and HFCL, had been one of the prime beneficiaries in the allotment of 2G spectrum during the reign of A Raja as the telecom minister. Earlier, in 1995, Mahendra Nahata had bid for nine 2G licences and had to be “bailed out” by the then Communications Minister Sukh Ram. The CAG draft report had further claimed that Reliance Jio had acquired the spectrum exploiting loopholes left by the DoT while framing rules for the auction of 4G broadband wireless access (BWA) spectrum. The company then allegedly wangled permission to provide mobile telephone services on this spectrum.
The final report of the CAG that was presented on 8 May, however, has diluted this criticism considerably. It has deleted important references in the draft report to the alleged “rigging” of the auction by two “colluding” parties: Reliance and Infotel.
Tweet This
Consumer Resources 